Although you have a point, I think it is safe to assume that if someone's house is broken into, he will report it. The same is true for most violent crimes. I agree it is a bit more problematic for White-Collar and technological crimes, since many times the victim is unaware of being attacked. Although the uncaught criminal rate may be higher than in violent crimes, I still think most are caught. And sorry, no citation.
You are correct. If someone during a police investigation pleaded guilty and then later retracted the plea, what do you think he would say? I'm sure it wouldn't be "Well, the police were very nice and all, and I did plea, but now that I think of it, I'll change my mind". Of course he will say he was pressured. And in a way he is correct: Part of the job of a police investigator is to pressure the suspect into pleading guilty. They usually do it to people who they think actually did do the crime. Now, I am not saying there aren't cases of innocent people forced into admitting something they didn't do, either due to hones mistakes or overzealous/bad cops, but I do honestly believe it doesn't happen as often as you imply. At least, I'll believe that way until you'll show me a better citation than a Google search (with all due respect to you and Google).
Our chief weapon is surprise. Surprise and fear... Our two weapons are fear and surprise... and horrible machine-language interpretation. Amongst our weapons.... Amongst our weaponry...are such elements as fear, surprise.... I'll come in again.
As an Israeli citizen, I can attest that most Israeli pilots are indeed positively affected by horny crocodiles. In fact, one of the tests they use to screen out new recruits is to see how they react to lizards. If you don't go all "They are so cute, I just wanna fly all over the place after seeing them", you don't pass on to the next phase of screening.
Don't worry, I understand that performing a randomized controlled trial (RCT) for each anti-oxidant and for each indication (anti-aging, preventing hearing loss, etc.) is unrealistic, I just wanted to state the fact that a RCT can be used to show causation. People here like to shout out loud "correlation is not causation" so much, that they forget that causation can be proved, albit very expensively.
No. If I take two groups of people, with both groups randomally assigned, as to discard the effect of any known and unknown confounders and then give each group a different treatment, any difference in outcome I see is due to the treatment. This is causation. Now, I know, not all RCT(randomized controlled trials) are set up well: They may not have enough participants to overcome random effects, or they may be set up by the drug company in a way that may show a benefit where there isn't much or there wan't proper randomization, but if done properly, a RCT can show causation. See Wikipedia.
Or to perform a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, prospective trial, which is the only way to prove causation... but let's see you do such an expensive trial for something as cheap as ant-oxidants. It's easier to just put on some marketing slogan and send it to the public to pay for.
Most of what you wrote is true, but a few corrections: 1) The symptoms you wrote are more common in type 1 Diabetes (i.e. the autoimmune disease, usually appearing in children). Adults usually get type 2 Diabetes (where the body develops insulin resistance). Patients with type 2 may have the disease for many years (average is 10y) before they are diagnosed, whilst in type 1 the disease appears rapidly and you get very high glucose levels which cause the symptoms you wrote. 2) Although we (the doctors) preach to keep the glucose levels low, the evidence so far is that keeping diabetes under control prevents some complications (renal failure and blindness) but is less effective in preventing other complications (heart disease and strokes). So, yes, a healthy diet is good, but I wouldn't go so far and say that a diabetic person who controls his disease will live longer than his non-diabetic peers.
Oh and one more thing: STOP SMOKING! (Written without using the Caps Lock key:) ).
What you assume is that we found out/will find out everything the army tries to keep secret and thus they are better off telling us everything in advance. However, it is very likely that many screw ups* are hidden and will stay that way. I would go so far and say that I believe that we are seeing only the tip of the iceberg. If that is the case, the army's policy does not need to change (from their point of view). Why devulge details about 10 fuck-ups, if the public will find out only 1 on its own? It's the same logic that prevents a company from fixing a 100 million dollar problem. The lawsuits that follow after the public finds out about the problem may cost much more than that, but since there are many problems to fix, they can't afford to fix them all and only wait to fix what surfaces on its own.
* I am not talking about things that really shuold be secret or the more problematic we-think-it-should-be-open-but-its-not-really-a-fuck-up grey areas.
I agree that a major part of the problem is a "need-to-know" issue. However, I don't think the army will publicize its steps on that issue. Just because they told us what the new regulations regarding removable storage are, doesn't mean they didn't set up new/refreshed procedures in other areas.
It's an OS that is actually a browser with Web apps. I think you could deduce from that that the target audience is someone who uses the computer mostly for Internet work and other applications that could be replaced with Web apps (e.g. Google Docs instead of MS Office). Although there are some on-line development environments, there is still no replacement for a dedicated programming software. I think also gamers, graphic designers and other people who need high end computers are not targeted by Chrome OS. The same goes for all the businesses who have custom software critical for their day to day operation.
Not to mentions that this is only the prototype beta notebook. I don't think the specification for the final Chrome OS notebook calls for no Caps Lock. I am sure it will be left for the manufacturer's discretion.
And the Hebrew keyboard uses it for Nikkud (The Hebrew diacritic signs, used instead of vowels). Although most writing in Hebrew is w/o Nikkud, sometimes it is used to help differentiate words with similar spelling but different pronunciations.
There's something wrong with your translation, USA still gets 0! Maybe you should try to translate to corporate-speak; this usually changes the facts in no time.
First of all, I didn't mean to put words in your mouth. What I meant is that the consequence of what you said, is what wrote in my OP. If I came out a bit condescending, my apologies. I agree that there is a difference between ads and tracking behavior, however my main point stands: Everyone of us gets to choose what trade-off he accepts for the services he uses. I use free services knowing that they track what I do. OTOH, since I don't want them to know everything about me, I choose what information I divulge. If you read all my posts on/. you will find only a few bits of information about me (which country I live in, my occupation and one or two of my hobbies). The same policy I have in every site I visit. If someone goes on Facebook and writes everything they do, including their name, social status and underwear color - surprise, someone will collect this info. I know that not all the information gathered about me is explicit. Google also collects which sites I visit from their search results, etc. I personally don't mind it. If you do, don't log-in, don't use their services or use anonymous browsing (It's built into every browser today and there are also non-mainstream solutions for this).
At least we can be comforted that many major companies tell you in their TOS that they collect info about you, although sadly not all of them. This is something that should be remedied before all else, IMHO.
I agree with that, and I wouldn't want to generalize one claim to all possible arguments. However, in these 2 issues I see some parallels that, I believe, allow me to state what I said in my previous post.
Slashdot Mirror
Although you have a point, I think it is safe to assume that if someone's house is broken into, he will report it. The same is true for most violent crimes.
I agree it is a bit more problematic for White-Collar and technological crimes, since many times the victim is unaware of being attacked. Although the uncaught criminal rate may be higher than in violent crimes, I still think most are caught. And sorry, no citation.
+5 Insightful and a smile of pedantic joy (no sarcasm).
You are correct. If someone during a police investigation pleaded guilty and then later retracted the plea, what do you think he would say? I'm sure it wouldn't be "Well, the police were very nice and all, and I did plea, but now that I think of it, I'll change my mind".
Of course he will say he was pressured. And in a way he is correct: Part of the job of a police investigator is to pressure the suspect into pleading guilty. They usually do it to people who they think actually did do the crime.
Now, I am not saying there aren't cases of innocent people forced into admitting something they didn't do, either due to hones mistakes or overzealous/bad cops, but I do honestly believe it doesn't happen as often as you imply. At least, I'll believe that way until you'll show me a better citation than a Google search (with all due respect to you and Google).
Unfortunately in the US's legal system many innocent people are forced to plead guilty by threats of excess punishment.
Citation please?
He is, it's called Crime. Contrary to popular belief, most criminals do get caught.
So you admit it was Google? I knew it! They probably also killed Kennedy.
Our chief weapon is surprise. Surprise and fear... Our two weapons are fear and surprise... and horrible machine-language interpretation. Amongst our weapons.... Amongst our weaponry...are such elements as fear, surprise.... I'll come in again.
As an Israeli citizen, I can attest that most Israeli pilots are indeed positively affected by horny crocodiles. In fact, one of the tests they use to screen out new recruits is to see how they react to lizards. If you don't go all "They are so cute, I just wanna fly all over the place after seeing them", you don't pass on to the next phase of screening.
Don't worry, I understand that performing a randomized controlled trial (RCT) for each anti-oxidant and for each indication (anti-aging, preventing hearing loss, etc.) is unrealistic, I just wanted to state the fact that a RCT can be used to show causation. People here like to shout out loud "correlation is not causation" so much, that they forget that causation can be proved, albit very expensively.
No. If I take two groups of people, with both groups randomally assigned, as to discard the effect of any known and unknown confounders and then give each group a different treatment, any difference in outcome I see is due to the treatment. This is causation.
Now, I know, not all RCT(randomized controlled trials) are set up well: They may not have enough participants to overcome random effects, or they may be set up by the drug company in a way that may show a benefit where there isn't much or there wan't proper randomization, but if done properly, a RCT can show causation. See Wikipedia.
Or to perform a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, prospective trial, which is the only way to prove causation... but let's see you do such an expensive trial for something as cheap as ant-oxidants. It's easier to just put on some marketing slogan and send it to the public to pay for.
It tastes like chicken
Bullshit, 3 petaflops should be enough for anyone.
Most of what you wrote is true, but a few corrections:
1) The symptoms you wrote are more common in type 1 Diabetes (i.e. the autoimmune disease, usually appearing in children). Adults usually get type 2 Diabetes (where the body develops insulin resistance). Patients with type 2 may have the disease for many years (average is 10y) before they are diagnosed, whilst in type 1 the disease appears rapidly and you get very high glucose levels which cause the symptoms you wrote.
2) Although we (the doctors) preach to keep the glucose levels low, the evidence so far is that keeping diabetes under control prevents some complications (renal failure and blindness) but is less effective in preventing other complications (heart disease and strokes). So, yes, a healthy diet is good, but I wouldn't go so far and say that a diabetic person who controls his disease will live longer than his non-diabetic peers.
Oh and one more thing: STOP SMOKING! (Written without using the Caps Lock key :) ).
What you assume is that we found out/will find out everything the army tries to keep secret and thus they are better off telling us everything in advance. However, it is very likely that many screw ups* are hidden and will stay that way. I would go so far and say that I believe that we are seeing only the tip of the iceberg. If that is the case, the army's policy does not need to change (from their point of view). Why devulge details about 10 fuck-ups, if the public will find out only 1 on its own?
It's the same logic that prevents a company from fixing a 100 million dollar problem. The lawsuits that follow after the public finds out about the problem may cost much more than that, but since there are many problems to fix, they can't afford to fix them all and only wait to fix what surfaces on its own.
* I am not talking about things that really shuold be secret or the more problematic we-think-it-should-be-open-but-its-not-really-a-fuck-up grey areas.
I agree that a major part of the problem is a "need-to-know" issue. However, I don't think the army will publicize its steps on that issue. Just because they told us what the new regulations regarding removable storage are, doesn't mean they didn't set up new/refreshed procedures in other areas.
im not laz... snore
Only if you tickle them.
It's an OS that is actually a browser with Web apps. I think you could deduce from that that the target audience is someone who uses the computer mostly for Internet work and other applications that could be replaced with Web apps (e.g. Google Docs instead of MS Office).
Although there are some on-line development environments, there is still no replacement for a dedicated programming software. I think also gamers, graphic designers and other people who need high end computers are not targeted by Chrome OS. The same goes for all the businesses who have custom software critical for their day to day operation.
Not to mentions that this is only the prototype beta notebook. I don't think the specification for the final Chrome OS notebook calls for no Caps Lock. I am sure it will be left for the manufacturer's discretion.
And the Hebrew keyboard uses it for Nikkud (The Hebrew diacritic signs, used instead of vowels). Although most writing in Hebrew is w/o Nikkud, sometimes it is used to help differentiate words with similar spelling but different pronunciations.
OTOH, database programmers aren't the intended target audience of Chrome OS. Just sayin'
There's something wrong with your translation, USA still gets 0! Maybe you should try to translate to corporate-speak; this usually changes the facts in no time.
First of all, I didn't mean to put words in your mouth. What I meant is that the consequence of what you said, is what wrote in my OP. If I came out a bit condescending, my apologies. /. you will find only a few bits of information about me (which country I live in, my occupation and one or two of my hobbies). The same policy I have in every site I visit.
I agree that there is a difference between ads and tracking behavior, however my main point stands: Everyone of us gets to choose what trade-off he accepts for the services he uses.
I use free services knowing that they track what I do. OTOH, since I don't want them to know everything about me, I choose what information I divulge. If you read all my posts on
If someone goes on Facebook and writes everything they do, including their name, social status and underwear color - surprise, someone will collect this info.
I know that not all the information gathered about me is explicit. Google also collects which sites I visit from their search results, etc. I personally don't mind it. If you do, don't log-in, don't use their services or use anonymous browsing (It's built into every browser today and there are also non-mainstream solutions for this).
At least we can be comforted that many major companies tell you in their TOS that they collect info about you, although sadly not all of them. This is something that should be remedied before all else, IMHO.
I agree with that, and I wouldn't want to generalize one claim to all possible arguments. However, in these 2 issues I see some parallels that, I believe, allow me to state what I said in my previous post.